alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-50099

Summary Calendar

 

BILLY DALE CARTER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GONZALES, Individually and in his Official Capacity; 

BANKS, Capt., Individually and in his Official Capacity; 

SAXON, Capt., Individually and in his Official Capacity; 

ALLEN, Lt., Individually and in his Official Capacity; 

WALDRUM, Nurse, Individually and in his Official Capacity; 

WARDEN JOHN DOE,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-95-CV-387

- - - - - - - - - -

February 18, 1997

Before JONES, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Billy Dale Carter, Texas prisoner # 625426, appeals the

judgment of the district court granting summary judgment in favor

of the defendants, denying his motion for summary judgment, and

dismissing claims against all of the defendants with prejudice. 

We have reviewed the record and the briefs and conclude that the 
No. 96-50099

- 2 -

district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor

of the defendants on the retaliation claim. We decline to review 

the Eighth Amendment and retaliation claims against Warden John

Doe and Ms. Price for plain error. See United States v.

Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-63 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc) (citing

U.S. v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 730-37 (1993)), cert. denied, 115

S. Ct. 1266 (1995). Accordingly, the judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED. The motions for appointment of an

investigator and counsel are DENIED. The motions to file an

amended brief and to withdraw the motion for a temporary

restraining order are GRANTED.

We repeat the sanctions imposed by this court in Carter v.

Gonzales, No. 96-50248 (5th Cir. Sep. 25, 1996). Carter is

barred from filing any pro se, in forma pauperis civil appeal in

this court, or any pro se, in forma pauperis, initial civil

pleading in any court which is subject to this court's

jurisdiction, without the advance written permission of a judge

of the forum court in active service. The clerk of this court

and the clerks of all federal district courts in this circuit are

directed to return to Carter, unfiled, any attempted submission

inconsistent with this bar.

AFFIRMED; SANCTIONS REPEATED.
#### In the Matter of Ian Watkiss, Appellant, v Karen Watkiss, Respondent.

[53 NYS3d 838]

Appeals by the father from four orders of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Joan S. Posner, J.), all dated January 21, 2016. The first order dismissed the father’s petition to modify the visitation provisions of a custody and visitation order dated May 30, 2013. The second order dismissed, after a hearing, the father’s petition dated November 2, 2015, in effect, alleging that the mother willfully violated the custody and visitation order. The third order dismissed the father’s violation petition dated November 13, 2015. The fourth order dismissed the father’s violation petition dated January 8, 2016.

Ordered that the appeals from the first, third, and fourth orders are dismissed as abandoned, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the second order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The appeals from the first, third, and fourth orders must be dismissed as abandoned, as the father’s brief does not raise any arguments concerning the propriety of those orders *(see Bibas v Bibas,*58 AD3d 586, 587 [2009]).

On November 2, 2015, the father filed a petition, in effect, alleging that the mother willfully violated a custody and visitation order dated May 30, 2013, by failing to make the parties’ daughter available to him for the 2015 Halloween weekend. On appeal, the father argues only that the Family Court erred in dismissing his petition without conducting a hearing and that the matter should be remitted for a hearing. We disagree. Contrary to the father’s contention, the proceedings held on November 13, 2015, and January 21, 2016, constituted a hearing.

Accordingly, the Family Court properly dismissed the father’s petition dated November 2, 2015.

Leventhal, J.P., Barros, Connolly and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.2

**RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Lawrence Safarek, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of First Niles Financial, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the consolidated financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material aspects the consolidated
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

> a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
> relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
> prepared;
> 
> b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
> controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
> 
> c) disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has
> materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors
and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

> a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
> record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
> 
> b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
> reporting

Date: May 14, 2004

---
Exhibit 4.3







 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated June 19, 2014, in this Registration Statement (File No. 333-195704) of Smart Trust,
Capital Innovations Global Infrastructure & MLP Trust, Series 6.


 


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


Grant
Thornton LLP


Chicago, Illinois


June 19, 2014
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1209-1210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00106]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB)

AGENCY: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Open Teleconference.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference call of the State 
Energy Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 
L. 92-463; 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings 
be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, January 24, 2013 from 3:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. (EST). To 
receive the call-in number and passcode, please contact the Board's 
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the address or phone number listed 
below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gil Sperling, STEAB Designated Federal 
Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585. 
Phone number is (202) 287-1644.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: To make 
recommendations to the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy regarding goals and objectives, 
programmatic and administrative policies, and to otherwise carry out 
the Board's responsibilities as designated in the State Energy 
Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-440).
    Tentative Agenda: Receive an update on the activities of the 
STEAB's Taskforces, review the activities of the newly formed STEAB 
Strategic Planning Subcommittee, and provide an update to the Board on 
routine business matters and other topics of interest, and begin 
discussion planning for a spring 2013 meeting.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact Gil Sperling at the address 
or telephone number listed above. Requests to make oral comments must 
be received five days prior to the

[[Page 1210]]

meeting; reasonable provision will be made to include requested 
topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the Board is empowered to conduct 
the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of 
business.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public 
review and copying within 60 days on the STEAB Web site at: 
www.steab.org.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on January 2, 2013.
LaTanya R. Butler,
Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-00106 Filed 1-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
No. 10-7117.

#### Sam Evans, Petitioner v. Florida.

562 U.S. 1145, 131 S. Ct. 918,

178 L. Ed. 2d 766,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 254.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District, denied.

*767Same case below, 38 So. 3d 135.
No. 10-739.

#### Hamdy Alex Abou-Hussein, Petitioner v. Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense, et al.

562 U.S. 1201, 131 S. Ct. 1055,

178 L. Ed. 2d 866,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 983.

January 24, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
2002 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

5-17-2002

USA v. Davis

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 01-2818

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2002 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"USA v. Davis" (2002). 2002 Decisions. Paper 282.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002/282
 NOT PRECEDENTIAL 

 THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 ___________ 

 No. 01-2818 

 ___________ 

 

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 vs. 

 JOHN DAVIS a/k/a John Davis-Bey 

 Appellant. 

 ___________ 

 ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 (D.C. Criminal No. 99-cr-00638) 

 District Judge: The Honorable Harvey Bartle, III 

 ___________ 

 Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) 

 April 19, 2002 

 BEFORE: NYGAARD, AMBRO, and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges. 

 (Filed May 17, 2002) 

 ___________ 

 OPINION OF THE COURT 

 ___________ 

NYGAARD, Circuit Judge. 

 Appellant, John Davis, argues on appeal that his counsel was ineffective for 

failing to request a downward adjustment under U.S.S.G 3B1.3. He argues that he was 

a minor participant in the conspiracy. Appellant also argues that his counsel was 

ineffective for failing to object to a two-level upward adjustment for the possession and 

use of a special skill. Because both of these arguments raise issues of fact that must first 

be resolved by the District Court, we conclude that neither issue is ripe for appeal. 

Government of the Virgin Islands v. Forte, 806 F.2d 73, (3d Cir. 1986) (An appellant may 

not raise ineffective assistance of counsel in a direct appeal when there is an insufficient 

record for appellate review.) Accordingly, we will dismiss the appeal. 

_________________________ 

TO THE CLERK: 
 Please file the foregoing opinion. 

 /s/ Richard L. Nygaard 

 Circuit Judge
Deliver the right solution on time, every time

WARFIGHTER FIRST - PEOPLE & CULTURE - STRATEGIC ENGAGEMENT - FINANCIAL STEWARDSHIP - PROCESS EXCELLENCE

Commander

USA O-6

Deputy

GS-15

DSTs

CENTCOM Support 

Branch

Bahrain/NAVCENT Qatar/AFCENT

CENTCOM

JLOC CoS/BMO SOCOM Support 

Branch

Troop 

Support

CORs

Assigned to Region

Assigned to PLFA

Assigned to HQC

11 Military

33 Civilians

5 Sites

CONUS

OCONUS

Energy 

Middle East

1 Civilian

2 Military

4 Civilians

3 Civilians

3 Sites

5 Civilians 4 Civilians

3 Sites

6 Civilians

4 Sites

5 Military

9 Civilians

28 Military

39 Civilians

5 Sites

DDNB DSD Cent

1 Civilian

TDY Mix

Military & 

Civilian

J6

Tech

Spt

1 Civilian

3 

Contractors

2 sites

HQ 

Disposition HQ DLA HQ Troop 

Support

HQ 

Energy

HQ 

Distribution HQ DLA

Other DLA collocated with

CENTCOM HQ and SOCOM HQ

USA O-5 USN O-5 USA O-5

Energy

Distribution

Troop 

Support

JCASO Deputy

USA O-6

MIL O-5

CENTCOM & SOCOM C2 Structure
#### *State, Respondent, v. Sorensen, Petitioner,*

No. 92105-9.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 46168-4-II, July 14, 2015, 188 Wn. App. 1052. *Denied*January 6, 2016.
No. 10-7823.

#### Willie Dee Crumpler, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1162, 131 S. Ct. 970,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 505.

178 L. Ed. 2d 797,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 393 Fed. Appx. 321.
No. 10-6222.

#### Eric Cunningham, Jr., Individually and By and Through His Father and Next Friend, Eric Cunningham, Sr., Petitioner v. City of West Point, Mississippi.

562 U.S. 1012, 131 S. Ct. 526,

178 L. Ed. 2d 388,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8587.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 380 Fed. Appx. 419.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998             SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0             311,470,902
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0               5,408,888
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                 553,998
<INVENTORY>                                          0                 441,135
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0             317,738,786
<PP&E>                                               0              59,118,994
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0               1,045,849
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0             639,156,208
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0              10,160,164
<BONDS>                                              0             300,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0  
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0             328,996,956
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0             639,156,208
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,804,629               8,804,629
<CGS>                                        2,299,332               2,299,332
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,874,575              16,405,366
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,475,140              14,444,382
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0                       0
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,058,786            (10,861,411)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,622,230)            (13,483,040)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
BACT Clearinghouse Search Results

7 matching record(s) found

District - All Districts

Category - Heater-Other Process

Pollutant - NOx

Capacity / 

Dimension Pollutant District Name District Contact 

Plant 

Name 

35 MMBtu/hr 20

Santa Barbara County APCD 

Mike Goldman

Celite View 

Determination

48 MMBtu/hr 20

Santa Barbara County APCD 

Mike Goldman

Celite View 

Determination

50 MMBtu/hr 73

Santa Barbara County APCD 

Mike Goldman

Celite View 

Determination

6.5 mmbtu/hr 20

South Coast AQMD 

Martin Kay

Southern 

California 

Gas Co

View 

Determination

19 MMBtu/hr 12

South Coast AQMD 

Martin Kay

NELCO 

Products. 

Inc,

View 

Determination

117.6 MMBtu/hr 50

South Coast AQMD 

Martin Kay

Praxair View 

Determination

 5

South Coast AQMD 

Martin Kay

Chevron 

Products 

Co.

View 

Determination

Report Results Page 1 of 1

http://www.arb.ca.gov/bact/bactnew/query.php 11/30/2009
Employee Reflection: David Oliver
 
  **Materials Examiner and Identifier (Forklift Operator)** **Portrait of David Oliver
        Employee Reflections: David Oliver
            Get to know David Oliver of DLA Disposition Services Ft. Bragg, North Carolina.

            SHARE IMAGE:

                Download Image
                    Image Details
                    
                    Photo By: DLA Disposition Services
                    
                    VIRIN: 220524-D-D0441-201**I’ve been married to my wife Christine for 52 years. We have two daughters and five grandchildren. Originally from Calhoun, Georgia I moved to Fort Bragg, North Carolina in 1985 on my last assignment and retired from the Army in 1990. **What is your current job?** Working with DEMIL property, warehousing, storage, shipping, and inventories of selected outbound property along with other warehousing duties. **How long have you worked for the federal government?** I served 24 years in the U.S. Army and 31 years with DLA for a total of 55 years federal time. **Favorite memories with DLA?** There are many, but my favorite memories were of sales day when we had public auctions and the reaction bidders. **What aspects of your job give you the most satisfaction?** Working around and with all the young service personnel. **What kind(s) of training and education helps your work performance in your current role?** Supply and maintenance assignments while in the military, with assignments at various depot disposal actives (PDOS) working as parts, and components identifier and classifier, equipment inspector and classifier in support of storage operations. **What would you say has been your major contributions to your organization this year in your job?** I help make sure property keeps moving, materiel release orders are pulled, and that property is shipped in a timely manner. **If you could speak directly to the warfighters you support, what would you tell them?** Keep the faith and stand tall. You are the backbone of our nation. **Where do you see yourself five years from now?** Retired **What is your best memory here DLA?** One of my first jobs here at DLA Ft. Bragg. Working with tri-wall boxes of rotary telephones turned-in to receiving that was to be destroyed and precious metals recovered. Also, remembering the military telephone network in Germany back in the 70’s. I really enjoyed that. **What or who is your biggest influence?** Ronald Reagan **Favorite quote:** "If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there."  - Lewis Carroll
**EXHIBIT 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No.333-112929 on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-52782 on Form S-3, Registration StatementNo. 33-63602 on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 333-72408 on Form S-3, and Post EffectiveAmendment No. 1 to Registration Statement Nos. 33-53563 and 33-53563-01 on Form S-3 of ourreports dated March 6, 2006 relating to the consolidated financial statements andfinancial statement schedule of Duquesne Light Company and management’s report on theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in the Annual Report onForm 10-K of Duquesne Light Company for the year ended December 31, 2005./s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPPittsburgh, Pennsylvania